Is This the New Normal?

By -
Today my son and I went to use the athletic facilities at my college. Near where we were, one of the women's athletic teams -- I'm not going to say which one, as my goal is social commentary and not the humiliation of an individual -- was practicing. This team's forty-something, male coach was addressing them, and was doing so with a stream of obscenities ("you lazy little f#*ks don't give a s;&t") that made me embarrassed I had brought my son there.

Is this now normal, that a forty-year-old man can address late-teen girls in this way with no fear of reprisal?

Comments

  1. Prateek2:38 AM

    I am not in the US, but I don't believe obscenities in formal environments are so easily tolerated in our age. May vary from country to country, but I am sure it's not common. In school, the last teacher who was too casual with the language he used around students (and teachers) lost his job.

    The likes of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs can use obscenities in the workplace, because of their status and the value they command. And they used their naughty tongues with impunity.

    ReplyDelete
  2. August1:34 PM

    It is actually worse; if he didn't treat them like that, they wouldn't respect him. The man has to thread a very strange needle to keep his job.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more